Compared with resting block, to the stationary observer, i) the moving block volume will appear to be less and ii) the moving block mass will appear to be more, hence iii) the moving block density will appear to be higher because of both of these effects.

No paradox. The pole will either always explode or always not explode for a fixed configuration of the (non-quantum, non Schrodinger Cat) system. For example if the relative pole length detector is on the pole itself then it will not explode. If the relative pole length detector is with the stationary observer then the pole will explode or be detonated (after suitable signal delay).

Fantastic- “really out there” indeed

Yes, except that this then raises the question of what “exist” means in this context i.e. is it more specific than being in the wave function of the universe?

Yes, something even stranger- the appearance of OU physics Lecturers in their pioneering 1970s tv broadcasts 🙂

What would it take for you to consider an artificial intelligence conscious and capable of receiving human rights?
Societal concensus and change in the laws, following persuasive new evidence. They would not necessarily be human rights but something analogous in the rights spectrum.

Do you believe that computers can ever be conscious?
Yes, because for example one might create a computer out of brain matter or brains or integrate brains and computers.

Do you think we will be able to create artificial consciousness without understanding the physical basis of our own consciousness?
This is possible because we have often been able to create something e.g. fire without at the time understanding its physical basis. We have also been able to expand consciousness historically through psychotropic drugs without at the time understanding the physical basis.

Consciousness means feeling the ghost in your own machine…